Skip to main content

About your Search

20121001
20121031
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
wider war, with really serious consequences that for turkey and perhaps for jordan and saudi arabia and because of economic consequences for europe, so i am afraid that the word i tend to emphasize in ts context the prudence, rather than engagement. >> rose:. >> but i think i heard both candidates say they would not put -- it was ditches in terms of what kind of arms they might supply on the one hand communication equipment an on the other hand from -- light to heavy -- >> you can't start supplying weapons with someone without becoming tied to the consequences of that, that kind of detach. from the supply of arms and eventual engagement in the process, especially if the supply of arms creates tetation tospre that w. >> rose: what do you do about arms? >> i think you do have to know who those arms are going to, because it could come back and haunt you, obviously. >> rose: but can you control that? >> well, whether we do it or somebody else does it, you know, it is happening, so. >> rose: the arms are going in, you mean? >> but, you know, i just came back from the region also, mostly
for a reason. this fire can quickly spread to turkey to jordan, to iraq. it is very dangerous. >> rose: may i ask this question, turning to another issue that is of great concern to the world, which is the success of negotiations between your government and the p-5 plus 1. where are you and do you believe there will be some success? >> we are hopeful that this will happen. this is why we are participating in the talks, in the negotiations. if there is no hope for success, then why would we even participate. however, we think that with technical and legal negotiations, we will not achieve anything. because our nuclear issue is not, is not legal and is not technical. you know about it because we have discussed it several times. >> rose: you believe it's a political question. >> yes t is clear t is clear that it's political. >> are you building a nuclear weapon? >> a nuclear weapon? for what, for what purpose, why would we do that? >> what would we use it for? >> you did not deny you are building a nuclear weapon. >> how many times should i repeat this opinions please, repeat it. please tell me
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)